Continuation Part 22: Amanda Knox/Raffaele Sollecito

[Vixen]

The burglary scene was not staged

(And your thesaurus is sure getting a good beating this evening! Well done!)

Clearly, you are reading from the Amanda Knox Thesaurus of Truths, graded from 'best' to 'worst' with a few inbetween, fibs, white lies, whoppers, porkies, calumnies, libels, dissemblings, gilding lilies and lack of frankness.

 

[Vixen]

Yes some (but not all) of the Italian courts ruled that the scene where a known burglar was spotted on CCTV snooping around in what would have been a dark empty cottage, and later left his bloody footprints and handprints in the cottage, at the very same time it had a rock smashed window above climbable metal bars below - closely matching this same burglar's previous rock smashed wall climbing break-in a couple blocks away - was not the work of this burglar, but an elaborate staging that only perfectly matched his work and he just happened to be there standing in the middle of it by sheer coincidence.

The reason I don't agree with that finding, is because I'm not a complete *********** idiot.

I despair!

 

[Methos]

My hand is 7 1/4 nches. I understand Stefanoni is tall for an Italian, so how do you know her hand wasn't similarly long fingered?

That is a silly way to measure anything.

It is a fact the boulder is 4.5 kg and has a diagonal of 29 cm. Not sure why you think it's debatable.

Looks like the 4kg is an approximation made by Pasquali

For the measurements take a look here:

Thank you, Methos. The police photo shows the width (w) and length (l) to be 20cm and 16 cm and its depth 11cm. According to Pythagoras, (l^2 + w^2 = d^2, where d = diagonal), that makes the diagonal 25.61cm. 20^2 + 16 ^2= 656.
.'. d = sq root 656 = 25.61249 Q.E.D. ::

By Stacey's own criterion, which she got from googling, as it is >25cm (or >10in), it is therefore perfectly correct to call it a 'boulder', and not an exaggeration or hyperbole.

Just for the record...

...and I'm not interested in the definition game, elsewhere the ever growing, unthrowable "pebble" "stone" "rock" "boulder" has reached the size of a "dwarf planet" by now...

 

[LondonJohn]

Just for the record...

...and I'm not interested in the definition game, elsewhere the ever growing, unthrowable "pebble" "stone" "rock" "boulder" has reached the size of a "dwarf planet" by now...

Or easily throwable when it suits the agenda for it to be throwable by Knox

 

[Stacyhs]

Thank you, Methos. The police photo shows the width (w) and length (l) to be 20cm and 16 cm and its depth 11cm. According to Pythagoras, (l^2 + w^2 = d^2, where d = diagonal), that makes the diagonal 25.61cm.

20^2 + 16 ^2= 656.
.'. d = sq root 656 = 25.61249 Q.E.D. ::

By Stacey's own criterion, which she got from googling, as it is >25cm (or >10in), it is therefore perfectly correct to call it a 'boulder', and not an exaggeration or hyperbole.

Well, Vixen, what I actually said was a boulder is >25.6 cm, not 25 cm. So, if the dimensions given were exactly 20 cm X 16 cm then yes, the diagonal was 25.61. You win by a whopping .01 cm! And that's if the dimensions were exact. However, you wrote " It is a fact the boulder is 4.5 kg and has a diagonal of 29 cm. Not sure why you think it's debatable." Clearly it was debatable because you were wrong.

So, yes. I'd say calling a rock that makes it technically a boulder by .01 cm is hyperbole. "In common usage, a boulder is too large for a person to move." (Meteorology Today) and (Elemental Geosystems)

 

[Wilson85]

Well, Vixen, what I actually said was a boulder is >25.6 cm, not 25 cm. So, if the dimensions given were exactly 20 cm X 16 cm then yes, the diagonal was 25.61.

The diagonal is only 25.61 if the stone is a rectangle .

Wikipedia:
In common usage, a boulder is too large for a person to move. Smaller boulders are usually just called rocks or stones.

 

[Bill Williams]

Given it is a fact, finding, determination, upholding, edict, reality, that the burglary scene was staged it's about time you accepted it, instead of coming up with ridiculous conspiracy theories.

The burglary scene was not staged

(And your thesaurus is sure getting a good beating this evening! Well done!)

The "staging" of the burglary was Factual within the Italian courts because it became a judicial fact. It became so at the end of the Rudy Guede Fast-Track trial(s), and therefore locked the rest of the trials concerning AK and RS into accepting it. What Vixen confuses as "they agreed with......" is as Mike 1711 pointed out on this thread weeks ago: "They are bound by......" is the proper rendering.

For instance, the Marasca/Bruno ISC panel were bound by all this - to avoid a “conflitto in giudicato”. Also note that as a fast-track trial, there was no evidence phase - so in this case, staging and multiple attackers were declared "factual" with no evidence presented. So future courts are stuck with it, unless they which to trigger a United Sections panel of ISC. (Marasca's reasoning - why trigger it when you're already acquitting the two?)

A “conflitto in giudicato” of the worst type happens when two definitive rulings, that is two different rulings issued by Cassation’s panels to close a case, conflict about the verdict on some element of the same case.​

Speaking of ridiculous conspiracy theories - anything that tries to erode the acquittal of AK and RS in March 2015 is one.

 

[Vixen]

The diagonal is only 25.61 if the stone is a rectangle .

Wikipedia:
In common usage, a boulder is too large for a person to move. Smaller boulders are usually just called rocks or stones.

Stacy was talking about exact technical detail, not colloquialisms.

If we know the boulder is 20cm x 16 cm x 11 cm and we know the weight is 9lbs 40z, then we can surmise its material is of sandstone.

ETA the fact the sandstone boulder is rectangular, underlines what a useless object it is to choose for throwing at speed or height.

 

[Vixen]

The "staging" of the burglary was Factual within the Italian courts because it became a judicial fact. It became so at the end of the Rudy Guede Fast-Track trial(s), and therefore locked the rest of the trials concerning AK and RS into accepting it. What Vixen confuses as "they agreed with......" is as Mike 1711 pointed out on this thread weeks ago: "They are bound by......" is the proper rendering.

For instance, the Marasca/Bruno ISC panel were bound by all this - to avoid a “conflitto in giudicato”. Also note that as a fast-track trial, there was no evidence phase - so in this case, staging and multiple attackers were declared "factual" with no evidence presented. So future courts are stuck with it, unless they which to trigger a United Sections panel of ISC. (Marasca's reasoning - why trigger it when you're already acquitting the two?)

​

Speaking of ridiculous conspiracy theories - anything that tries to erode the acquittal of AK and RS in March 2015 is one.

And this judicial fact is based on expert witness testimony, cross-examined and tried. Many expert witnesses.

What is science but a consensus of opinion.

 

[Vixen]

Well, Vixen, what I actually said was a boulder is >25.6 cm, not 25 cm. So, if the dimensions given were exactly 20 cm X 16 cm then yes, the diagonal was 25.61. You win by a whopping .01 cm! And that's if the dimensions were exact. However, you wrote " It is a fact the boulder is 4.5 kg and has a diagonal of 29 cm. Not sure why you think it's debatable." Clearly it was debatable because you were wrong.

So, yes. I'd say calling a rock that makes it technically a boulder by .01 cm is hyperbole. "In common usage, a boulder is too large for a person to move." (Meteorology Today) and (Elemental Geosystems)

LOL how irrational to suddenly change the goalpost. Terrible logic.

 

[Bill Williams]

And this judicial fact is based on expert witness testimony, cross-examined and tried. Many expert witnesses.

What is science but a consensus of opinion.

This part is missing from a fast-track trial. The "staging" and the "multiple attackers" were never subject to cross examination.

 

[acbytesla]

I thought I'd throw those little tidbit into the mix since in the past Vixen and other members of the PG has suggested that the school that Knox attended wasn't considered to be a very prestigious University.

This little tidbit in the Washington Post. FYI, Vixen the Post is not in the State of Washington but in Washington DC.
World University Rankings 2016-2017
The Times Higher Education World University Rankings 2016-2017 list the 980 top universities in the world, making it our biggest international league table to date. It is the only global university performance table to judge world class universities across all of their core missions – teaching, research, knowledge transfer and international outlook.

1. Oxford
2. Caltech
3. Stanford University
4. University of Cambridge
5. Massachusetts Institute of Technology
6. Harvard University
7. Princeton University
8. Imperial College London
9. ETH Zurich — Swiss Federal Institute of Technology
10. (tie) University of California at Berkeley
10. (tie) University of Chicago
12. Yale University
13. University of Pennsylvania
14. University of California, Los Angeles
15. University College London
16. Columbia University
17. Johns Hopkins University
18. Duke University
19. Cornell University
20. Northwestern University
21. University of Michigan
22. University of Toronto
23. Carnegie Mellon University
24. National University of Singapore
25. (tie) London School of Economics and Political Science
25. (tie) University of Washington

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...oxford-takes-a-turn-as-top-global-university/

 

[Stacyhs]

LOL how irrational to suddenly change the goalpost. Terrible logic.

And this coming from the "goal post changing" queen! It does not change the fact the you said it was a fact and not debatable that the diagonal measurement was 29 cm when your own math proved it was 25.61, a mere .01 over the technical geological requirement of a boulder and contrary to the common usage of "boulder". LOL!

 

[Stacyhs]

This part is missing from a fast-track trial. The "staging" and the "multiple attackers" were never subject to cross examination.

Oh, Bill! Don't bring up facts. They only muddy the issue.

 

[Bill Williams]

This part is missing from a fast-track trial. The "staging" and the "multiple attackers" were never subject to cross examination.

Oh, Bill! Don't bring up facts. They only muddy the issue.

For the most part the "expert" on the issue of the staging was Mignini himself. One of the Postal Police, prior to the horrid discovery, looked at Filomena's room and said, "This is no burglary", which indeed it wasn't. The crime was in the next room.

So how does one cross-examine Mignini? He's the "expert" pushing the idea.

What is of interest about the multiple attackers is that the Massei court only heard one of 9 experts who said it had to be more than one attacker. Massei settled that "judicial fact" on other grounds, mainly on the grounds that he'd convicted the pair!!

 

[bagels]

If you read Massei he doesn't disagree with the defense expert reconstruction of the break-in, he just basically says "yes the defense proved it could happen that way but actually I think it happened this way...."

He says it is theoretically possible that, if the window was held open at just the perfect angle, and the rock was thrown against it from just the right angle, it would maybe be possible to break the window from inside the room leaving the dents and embedded glass in the inner shutter. This doesn't explain the glass distribution, namely the absence of glass in the dresser side of the room where all this force would have been directed in this example. He hand waves this away saying the glass must have "blown sideways" towards the nightstand by being redirected from the inner shutter...seemingly inventing his own ballistic theories out of thin air while totally ignoring the defense ballistic expert that said this scenario is inconsistent with the glass distribution.

But this is Massei's whole report, a reverse burden of proof where if something theoretically could have happened - and it makes the students guilty - it did happen.

The PGP eat this crap up lol

 

[bagels]

Massei's theory of glass magically breaking entirely perpendicular to the direction the projectile is thrown from isn't even internally consistent, since there would be glass "blown sideways" in both directions, meaning glass would get caught in the outer shutter, and it would either fall through outside or onto to the outer sill to be pushed outside when the shutter was open, or it would get trapped inside the shutter to be discovered by the investigators. Since we know they examined every millimeter of the outside ground with a scanning electron microscope and no glass was found, and obviously no glass was found in the shutters, this didn't happen. We can only speculate as to why, but my guess would be the shutters were pulled wide open and a rock was thrown from outside, crashing through the glass, smashing into the inner shutter causing a large fresh dent, and embedding multiple glass shards into the inner shutter which gave way, and the glass followed this directional force straight into the room where it spread back towards the nightstand, consistent with the ballistic reconstruction, all known physics, and common sense.

I think the person who used the rock to smash the glass, and climbed up 3 1/2 meters on the metal bars under the window to get into the room, was the guy who left bloody footprints and a bloody handprint in the cottage that night. Another point in favor of this radical idea, is this particular individual just two weeks prior to this incident, was connected by strong criminal evidence to a break-in a few blocks away, where the intruder had similarly climbed metal bars up about 3-4 meters, and used a large rock to smash the window to get inside.

The same burglar tied by criminal evidence to two wall climbing rock bashing second story window break-ins within blocks and weeks of each other. Hmmm. As Frances McDormand so eloquently put it in the hit movie Fargo, it'd be quite a coincidence if they weren't...you know...connected!

Just my little analysis on this extremely straight forward and self evident case that didn't deserve much thought after Nov 20th 2007.

 

[Bill Williams]

Massei's theory of glass magically breaking entirely perpendicular to the direction the projectile is thrown from isn't even internally consistent, since there would be glass "blown sideways" in both directions, meaning glass would get caught in the outer shutter, and it would either fall through outside or onto to the outer sill to be pushed outside when the shutter was open, or it would get trapped inside the shutter to be discovered by the investigators. Since we know they examined every millimeter of the outside ground with a scanning electron microscope and no glass was found, and obviously no glass was found in the shutters, this didn't happen. We can only speculate as to why, but my guess would be the shutters were pulled wide open and a rock was thrown from outside, crashing through the glass, smashing into the inner shutter causing a large fresh dent, and embedding multiple glass shards into the inner shutter which gave way, and the glass followed this directional force straight into the room where it spread back towards the nightstand, consistent with the ballistic reconstruction, all known physics, and common sense.

I think the person who used the rock to smash the glass, and climbed up 3 1/2 meters on the metal bars under the window to get into the room, was the guy who left bloody footprints and a bloody handprint in the cottage that night. Another point in favor of this radical idea, is this particular individual just two weeks prior to this incident, was connected by strong criminal evidence to a break-in a few blocks away, where the intruder had similarly climbed metal bars up about 3-4 meters, and used a large rock to smash the window to get inside.

The same burglar tied by criminal evidence to two wall climbing rock bashing second story window break-ins within blocks and weeks of each other. Hmmm. As Frances McDormand so eloquently put it in the hit movie Fargo, it'd be quite a coincidence if they weren't...you know...connected!

Just my little analysis on this extremely straight forward and self evident case that didn't deserve much thought after Nov 20th 2007.

I love Margie's take on the bleedingly straight-forward!

I was one early on who got sucked into parsing Kermit's powerpoint on this, the powerpoint which "proved" that the break-in through Filomena's window was impossible.

What that was - and all PGP criticism of the break-in since - has been a bizarre rhetorical battle against the obvious. The sheer volume of rhetorical analysis/denial of what was a very simple and quick set of acts by Rudy to gain access to the cottage says it all.

​

The Channel 5 demonstration sealed the deal - and that one has been met by the PGP with cries of forgery and crafty editting of what otherwise is a pedestrian climb when one sees it for oneself. (It also beggars belief that neither the prosecution nor any of the courts ordered a demonstration similar to what Channel 5 eventually did! But they ruled it a judicial fact anyway!)

Yet the one thing the PGP never address is the Massei report itself. The Massei report from 2010 said that the climb to the window was very doable. He just said he didn't think Rudy would have climbed up there three times (or was it twice?) because one of the tasks would have been to open the outer shutter to facilitate the rock-throw.

And as the Channel 5 demonstration more than adequately shows, by the time it took me to type this - Rudy would have been up and in and sitting on the toilet dealing with the kebob! Laying in wait for the victim's return home.

Counter to this is a judicial fact generated at a trial with no evidence posed - namely, at Rudy's fasttrack trial. That was a trial where both prosecution AND defence (Rudy's defence) had motive to claim the break-in was staged. And once so stipulated (in the absence of representation from Amanda and Raffaele) those two go into their trial with judicial facts already set in stone.

It's like going up to bat with the count already 0 balls - 2 strikes.

Let's count the number of times that PGP stress the "judicial" in the "judicial fact" nature of the way this fact was generated. Once it got to the 2015 Marasca ISC Panel - my view is that those judges could see the problem here. They resolved the problem by remaining bound by this judicial fact and releasing the kids on other grounds; namely, that the evidence in front of the Nencini court simply did not justify a conviction to begin with.

So send the kids home, tell them to get on with their lives and simply restate that the staged-break-in was a judicial fact which they, the court, was bound by, and let the Kerchers begin that painful closure process that had been denied them for 7 1/2 years.

 

[Vixen]

I thought I'd throw those little tidbit into the mix since in the past Vixen and other members of the PG has suggested that the school that Knox attended wasn't considered to be a very prestigious University.

This little tidbit in the Washington Post. FYI, Vixen the Post is not in the State of Washington but in Washington DC.
World University Rankings 2016-2017
The Times Higher Education World University Rankings 2016-2017 list the 980 top universities in the world, making it our biggest international league table to date. It is the only global university performance table to judge world class universities across all of their core missions – teaching, research, knowledge transfer and international outlook.

1. Oxford
2. Caltech
3. Stanford University
4. University of Cambridge
5. Massachusetts Institute of Technology
6. Harvard University
7. Princeton University
8. Imperial College London
9. ETH Zurich — Swiss Federal Institute of Technology
10. (tie) University of California at Berkeley
10. (tie) University of Chicago
12. Yale University
13. University of Pennsylvania
14. University of California, Los Angeles
15. University College London
16. Columbia University
17. Johns Hopkins University
18. Duke University
19. Cornell University
20. Northwestern University
21. University of Michigan
22. University of Toronto
23. Carnegie Mellon University
24. National University of Singapore
25. (tie) London School of Economics and Political Science
25. (tie) University of Washington

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...oxford-takes-a-turn-as-top-global-university/

You have failed to differentiate between (a) postgrad research and (b) departments. So, whilst, say Uni of Nowhere has an overall top ranking, OTOH, it might be poor at post grad research (and this is what makes for a truly prestigious ranking) or it might have a department in some subject which is low in rank compared to another uni elsewhere lower in the over all ranking.

Generic league tables, as this one is, 'covering all missions' are misleading unless you understand the assumptions behind them. For example, I note Edinburgh is missing, but it is one of the finest medical unis in the UK, so if you want a top doctor or medical research assistant, you would see the Edinburgh candidate as having the edge on an Oxford one, ceteris paribus.

I didn't say UW wasn't prestigious. You must be thinking of someone else.

It was once a common perception in the UK that some US degrees were little better than 2 UK A-Levels. Creative writing degrees in the UK are generally one-year postgrad masters courses.

 

[Vixen]

And this coming from the "goal post changing" queen! It does not change the fact the you said it was a fact and not debatable that the diagonal measurement was 29 cm when your own math proved it was 25.61, a mere .01 over the technical geological requirement of a boulder and contrary to the common usage of "boulder". LOL!

AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAAAHHAAA!!!

Someone tell her why I am ROLFMAOBAG.